Attack of the Five Monarchies

It is the irony of ironies. A cadre of repressive monarchies is chosen to liberate the captive peoples of Iraq and Syria from the tyranny of ISIS.

Combating a group known for its violent sectarianism, the five Arab allies ordered by the United States to participate in the bombing campaign against ISIS are themselves the region’s worst sectarian agitators. Jordan, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are now at the vanguard of efforts to dismantle an organization that is essentially of their own creation.

After the downfall of Saddam Hussein, it was King Abdullah II of Jordan who raised the sectarian specter, warning of the emergence of a "Shiite crescent" in the Middle East, sending panic throughout the monarchies of the Gulf and beyond. It was a rallying cry; a call to arms which heralded operations to destabilize Iraq, and in less than ten years time, Syria.

Bahrain has been a true standout in its brutal crackdown against pro-democracy activists and reformers who hope to see the unchecked powers of the al-Khalifa royal family restrained. For its part, the regime has hidden nothing. Their brazen oppression is very much out in the open for its Western allies to witness: torture, show trials, arbitrary detentions, revocation of citizenship, deportations and media blackouts. All are daily occurrences and come in the backdrop of longstanding socioeconomic and political disenfranchisement. Two of the country’s most prominent human rights defenders are Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, the (imprisoned) co-founder of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and Nabeel Rajab, its current president. Rajab succinctly contextualizes Bahrain’s political crisis:

"The ruling family is Sunni. The ruling family is repressive. It’s
true that the majority of protesters are Shia, because the majority of the population
is Shia, but we are not against the family’s religion – we are against their
policies, attitude and behavior. The ruling family tries to present it as a
Shia-Sunni issue, but we are not against the Sunni people.

I come from a mixed family and our revolt is against the ruling family that
wants to keep all the power. We are struggling to share this power. Seventy
percent of our government is from one family, we have had the same prime minister
for more than 40 years. This system can’t continue. It is time for democracy,
justice and human rights. We are a civilized, educated nation. But unfortunately
we happen to be ruled by a tribe."

Saudi Arabia and Qatar must be mentioned in tandem. The two rival families
– al-Saud and al-Thani respectively – have long vied for power and influence
in the Middle East. Initially it was through the dueling television stations
Al Arabiya and Al-Jazeera. It has since become far more sinister: by funding
competing, armed extremist groups. Qatar has effectively abandoned the Muslim
Brotherhood as its proxy of choice, opting instead for the de facto al-Qaeda
stand-in, Jabhat al-Nusra or the Nusra Front, one of the main "opposition"
factions operating in Syria. Its main competitor of course is ISIS, the brainchild
of Saudi Arabia. Patrick Cockburn, writing in The Independent, nicely
details how Saudi Arabia was complicit in helping ISIS take over northern Iraq.
Other journalists have drawn similar conclusions.

ISIS is a takfiri group branding anyone not conforming to their regressive ideology as worthy of execution, particularly Shia Muslims, Alawites, Christians and Yazidis. Members of ISIS’ own (purported) sect – Sunni Muslims – are given a reprieve of sorts but have equally suffered under their rule. In Saudi Arabia, the official Wahabi creed is only one step removed from the takfiri worldview. It comes as no surprise to learn that its Shia citizens are the victims of pervasive, institutionalized discrimination. Some clerics in the Kingdom have even gone so far as to brand them non-Muslims (which opens up a whole set of permissive practices), a view likewise held by ISIS.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has worked in concert with Saudi Arabia in opposing certain political parties, namely the Muslim Brotherhood. Along with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the UAE was the only other country to officially recognize Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Notorious for cracking down on all forms of dissent, the UAE also has a habit of deporting Lebanese Shia expatriates from the country, presuming a connection to Hezbollah based on sect alone.

"America is proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with these nations on
behalf of our common security," Obama said. "The strength of this
coalition makes it clear to the world that this isn’t America’s fight alone.
Above all, the people and governments of the Middle East are rejecting ISIL
…"

Obama naively equates the Arab people with their governments. The people of the Middle East reject not only ISIS, but these five monarchies and all their machinations and schemes as well. Including them in any coalition to fight the very sectarian, destructive monster they directly or indirectly helped create is yet another reason why the military campaign against ISIS is destined for failure.

Author: Rannie Amiri

Not at all. That guy is all about "elect, elect, elect". He doesn't care about any REAL-WORLD consequences of ANYTHING he does. It is all just a large game of politics to him.

"Naiveté" in politicians? Sorry to say, that's a cover.

Guest

The serpent in the garden is Jordan. It was established by the British precisely for the same reason. The great grand father of late King of Jordan duped the Palestinian ,,established clandestine relations with Zionism ,and cut out deals with local nobles . The traditions haven't died out .

RickR30

By now we know that the whole fake war against IS is about toppling the Syrian government.

Park

Still the same idiot censor is here?

MvGuy

They claim they do not sencor.. But the correct spelling of that S word has caused my comment to vanish… Is it J.R. ????? I think not… Lots of arcane posts & strange occurrences.. I have been singled out for posting a link to a “hate site” …… Told it was against the “rules”. But I have been here 10 years or more…… And despite numerous requests to SEE the rules or guidelines for commenting, I have never seen ANY rules…

My question is: Who determines whether or not a site is a hate site. It seems to me that the site I linked to is in fact an an information clearing house that can sometimes be politically incorrect. The name of the site is The Millennium Report.. Tell me, us…. what you thank…

1) “They claim they do not sencor.. But the correct spelling of that S word has caused my comment to vanish.” Nope. Whatever it is you’re referring to, comments are not deleted for referring, however incorrectly, to censorship.

2) ” Is it J.R. ?????” No, Mr. Raimondo is not a comment moderator here.

3) ” despite numerous requests to SEE the rules or guidelines for commenting, I have never seen ANY rules” That raises the question of whether you’re lying, or whether you just refuse to look at the response when you ask to see the rules and I show them to you. The rules are: No spam, no hate speech. They’re that simple, you’ve been shown them over and over, and if you haven’t seen them it’s because you don’t want to see them.

“My question is: Who determines whether or not a site is a hate site.”